Differences in Sex Development (aka "intersex")

jimbob said:
What is someone with XXY chromosomes or XY chromosomes but androgen insensitivity?
Click to expand...

Klinefelter is a male-specific condition, and someone with an XXY chromosome set is a male.

XY with Partial androgen insensitivity is male. Someone with Complete androgen insensitivity is often considered female, as their body follows the mullerian developmental pathway, and they never develop any male physical traits, even though they have sterile internal testes.

jimbob said:
I think intersex is a good description.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's a good description. Specifically because it gives the impression that people with DSDs are somehow not male or female - and that's simply false. In fact, the overwhelming majority of people with a DSD are unambiguously male or female. Most DSDs don't present with genital ambiguity at all, but rather with fertility and pubertal problems.
 
Emily's Cat said:
In what way does it matter?
Click to expand...
At the risk of stating the blatantly obvious, we've got one sporting category for males, another one for females, and a bloody culture war battlefield about what to do with people who have both male and female characteristics, such as Semenya, Wambui, & Niyonsaba (a field upon which the IOC has largely abdicated leadership).

Emily's Cat said:
Intersex isn't a different sex, it's a misleading term for a subset of disorders of sexual development. It's a term that isn't generally used by the medical community, in part because it gives the false impression that people with these conditions are somehow neither male or female, or some combination thereof.
Click to expand...
Individuals with DSDs often present with "some combination" of traits which are typical to one sex or the other. For example, the androgenization of the aforementioned individual athletes matches their genetic sex but their genitalia at birth did not.
 
Last edited:
d4m10n said:
At the risk of stating the blatantly obvious, we've got one sporting category for males, another one for females, and a bloody culture war battlefield about what to do with people who have both male and female characteristics, such as Semenya, Wambui, & Niyonsaba (a field upon which the IOC has largely abdicated leadership).
Click to expand...

We have a category for females... and we have people who are male who have been allowed to compete against females in that sex-restricted category.

Semenya, Wambui, and Niyonsaba are all males. Semenya's condition is known - 5-ARD. Wambui and Niyonsaba are believed to have the same condition.

It is a male-specific condition.

Why on earth do you think we should waive sex restrictions so that some males who aren't G. I. Joe can compete against females? Why should females be expected or obligated to act as props in this way?

And honestly, right now, I'm thoroughly incensed. Ting and Khelif are both obviously male. Neither of them has any visible female characteristics; both of them have entirely male characteristics. They're not ambiguous, they're not androgynously, there's nothing about them that even suggests "oh, well maybe".
 
d4m10n said:
Does anyone happen to have good evidence for/against the proposition that Imane Khelif is intersex?
Click to expand...

I have a lot of hearsay and conjecture. Those are ... kinds of evidence.

Anyway, if we're playing internet sleuth, not having a Y chromosome should be easy enough to prove, and probably the best course of action for an athlete without a Y chromosome, if for no other reason than to shut out most of the noise.

The fact that this hasn't happened does point to something going on. But here my medical knowledge fails me, and I suppose there might be other reasons why someone would not simply get this over with.
 
Just like Obama's presenting his birth certificate got it over with. Oh wait, that added fuel to the fire....
 
Silly Green Monkey said:
Just like Obama's presenting his birth certificate got it over with. Oh wait, that added fuel to the fire....
Click to expand...

Yes, a subset of the population will always be crazy. I guess that means providing any sort of data is always a bad idea. Carry on then.
 
It's more presenting data to those who have a need or right to know, which isn't us. The leering public doesn't deserve to know the private(s) data of another person, famous or not.
 
Silly Green Monkey said:
It's more presenting data to those who have a need or right to know, which isn't us. The leering public doesn't deserve to know the private(s) data of another person, famous or not.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I feel like the opponents deserve to know. But then, the IOC did say the boxers were female, so I guess they do know. Never mind.
 
Olmstead said:
Fair enough. I feel like the opponents deserve to know. But then, the IOC did say the boxers were female, so I guess they do know. Never mind.
Click to expand...
Well, born without external genitalia is recorded as female.
That seems completely sane.
The insanity flows as science is introduced.
 
JihadJane said:
You call this fact=based?:

"While a literal convicted paedophile who raped a 12 year old girl and has no remorse for doing so competes at the games, transphobes and misogynists target a woman for not looking feminine enough, because a friend of Putin said so."
Click to expand...

It is arguably fact-based, it's just that many of the facts are wrong.
 
Pre-Olympics: Haha, you guys can't even answer the question "What is a woman?" It's obvious!

Post-Olympics: A woman isn't a woman! It's a lot more complicated than that!
 
Ryokan said:
Pre-Olympics: Haha, you guys can't even answer the question "What is a woman?" It's obvious!

Post-Olympics: A woman isn't a woman! It's a lot more complicated than that!
Click to expand...
For purposes of elite international combat sports, what is a woman?

I assume you can also provide a workable answer with ease, since you're sarcastigating those who say it's complicated.
 
Ryokan said:
Pre-Olympics: Haha, you guys can't even answer the question "What is a woman?" It's obvious!

Post-Olympics: A woman isn't a woman! It's a lot more complicated than that!
Click to expand...

It's actually pleasantly simple.
 
Ryokan said:
Pre-Olympics: Haha, you guys can't even answer the question "What is a woman?" It's obvious!

Post-Olympics: A woman isn't a woman! It's a lot more complicated than that!
Click to expand...

I haven't seen anyone say anything like that. I've seen people point out that a male with a DSD that only affects males is not female.
 
d4m10n said:
I haven't seen any reporting to suggest that the IOC did any testing subsequent to the IBA DQs.
Click to expand...

Yes, but why should they? Someone's appearance isn't a justification for a witch hunt, so she shouldn't be subjected to any testing that isn't already standard.

The discussion of introducing procedures for weeding out intersex males, if indeed that is something the IOC wants to do, needs to happen separately.

My only issue with the current saga is the opaqueness. Does the IOC want to keep intersex males out of the female category or not? Do they have procedures in place for doing that or not? Do they simply trust national documents? Do such national documents always go by biology or not?

I feel like I don't have a clear answer to any of these questions, so if someone could elucidate them, that'd be welcome.
 
Olmstead said:
The discussion of introducing procedures for weeding out intersex males, if indeed that is something the IOC wants to do, needs to happen separately.
Click to expand...
IOC gave that up back in the 90s, which is why we've seen biological women crowded off their awards podiums in the last couple decades.

Olmstead said:
Does the IOC want to keep intersex males out of the female category or not?
Click to expand...
Not.

Olmstead said:
Yes, but why should they?
Click to expand...
Because female sport is predicated on keeping male athletes out.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom